Rassegna storica del Risorgimento

Engiand, Piedmont, and the Cagliari affair 159
Malmesbury promised to reply once he had received the new opinion of the Law Officers. He could only apologise fot the note of 5 January. The phrase disposed to object, Malmesbury informed Azeglio, had been added inadvertendy by Erskbe, without the knowledge or assent of either Hudson or the English govemment The govemment had not even known of the note until Azeglio had communicated a copy of it on 10 March,40)
Azeglio, who seems to have been genuinely unaware of the true cir-cumstances surrounding the note of 5 January,41) responded to this an-nouncement with unconcealed indignation. Although he claimed that he did not have the authority to make the la moindre remarque sur l'importance d'un pareil malentendu , Azeglio nevertheless made clear the importance which he believed the Piedmontese govemment had attached to the note of 5 January. It was stili to be hoped, Azeglio stateci, that once facts and legai arguments had been considered, que rinadvertence ou l'erreur deviennent une vérité. The two Cabinets, relying upon the same principles of interna-tional law, might then act in concert pour revendiquer ce qui leur est dù. Even if abandoned by England, Azeglio warned, Piedmont would carry on alone, avec la prudence et la modération qui ont caracterisé ses actes jusqu'ici, mais aussi avec l'energie et la fermeté qu'inspirent le sentiment du droit et de la dignité nationale.42)
Malmesbury did not take kindly to Azeglio's outburst Malmesbury deduced that Azeglio and Cavour sought to exact the maximum politicai capital our of the note of 5 January in order to force the English govem­ment to go through thick and thin with Piedmont in the matter of the Cagliari. That I object to, because we have the smallest stake in the busi­ness. Ours is with the two Britishers [...] Without Sardinia and her ship 40 peopkj we might easily get liberty compensation too. Regarding Azeglio, Malmesbury commented: I wish he was away [...] he will never run straight [...] I am very sorry for ali this because I have a great predilec-tion for Sardinia.43)
*9 Malmesbury to E. d'Azeglio, 23 Match 1858, Correspondence respecting the Cagliari, pp. 131-132.
41> Azeglio wrote to Cavour Il est très triste [...] Je ne sais réellement qui mefite le blame le plus réel [...] H est positif en tous cas qu'en lisant une note du Ministre d'Angicterrc il nous était difficile d'imagincr qu'il fallaii: l'intcrpretec en sens diamétralcment contraire. Azeglio complained of Les mystèrcs du Foreign Office which, he said, made it impossible to discovcr the truth conccrning the the note of 5 January. E. d'Azeglio to Ca­vour, 30 March 1858, AST, Lettere Ministri Gran Bretagna (1858-1859), box 126. See also: Cavour e l'Inghilterra cit, II (i), n. 1, p. 202,
*9 E. d'Azeglio to Malmesbury, 24 March 1858, Correspondence respecting the Cagliari, p. 132. Azeglio's warning reflected Cavour's comments in his despatch to Azeglio of 19 March (see footnote n. 39).
*?) Malmesbury to Hudson, 8 Aprii 1858, HRO, MP, 9M73/54.